Oh- THOSE Jobs....

It appears that the MSM may have finally noticed that the economy, contrary to their badly-hidden hopes, is not tanking. Reuters today published an article stating that a survey conducted by an employment consulting firm showed the best market for new college graduates since 2001. The same survey, which was conducted by Challenger, Gray and Christmas, said that the United States "is approaching full employment".

This is not exactly a secret to anyone who has been following the actual state of the economy, instead of listening to Paul Krugman and like critics of the Bush Administration who wish that the economy was doing as badly as they would like, thus justifying their desire for Soviet-syle economics (and allowing them to realize their dreams of power). However, it shows once again that our nation's so-called 'mainstream media' are still refusing to face that their constant features on the 'bad economy' have been as false as their professed 'objectiivty'. Maybe this new survey, which even Resuters was unable to ignore, will make the media a little more responsible in publishing truth as opposed to waht they wish was truth!

Regarding the many folks on the Left who have a vested interest in seeing the US economy fail, I am constantly in wonderment over these leftist economists, who despite socialism's blatant failures wherever it has been tried, are still willing to try it yet again. Capitalism is not perfect, but no other economic system has shown the results, while simultaneously raising the style of living for those who are fortunate enough to live in cultures that do embrace it.

Leftisits seem to be interested in socialism only because it empowers the elites to use the ordinary folks as human guinea-pigs, on whom they may experiment. None of the Leftist elitists- not Paul (The Professor) Krugman, not Teddy (The Lush) Kennedy, nor Hillary (Care) Clinton, all of whom espouse some form of socialism, have ever been forced to live in a socialist economy. All of them have gained their wealth through capitalism. Maybe actually living as an ordinary worker in a socialist economy might open their eyes to the realities of life. In any event, I trust that this new survey might eliminate some of the false stories regarding the 'bad economy' and perhaps even the MSM will finally cease their false tales and publish the truth- that the Bush Administration has been largely successful,. despite some very serious natural (and non-natural) disasters, in steering the economy onto a solid path.

On Health Care

Democrats and leftists like to denigrate the health care offered in the United States. These same folks (none of whom have ever or will ever have to work for a living) like Senator Hillary Clinton of New York seem to think that somehow people who are earning an honest living ought to have to pay for the needs of those who are a) here illegally or b) less wealthy or c) less talented. I disagree with that idea. I also disagree with their assessment of US health care.

I recently was diagnosed with cancer. As a member of the Kasier Permanente healthcare organization, I was prepared for problems. However, I discovered that I was completely covered and my surgery and suibsequent stay in hospital was entirely free for me. I also discovered that the services rendered and the ease of access were beyond reproach as well. My family had no problems contacting me, and I have absolutely no complaints with the quality of care offered.

I was diagnosed on a Monday. Two weeks later, I have had the surgery completed and have already contacted my follow-up doctors regarding post-operative care. There have been no problems and I have no complaints. This has been my experience in general with US health care. I have never reallly had any complaints with the level of care, nor even with the accessibility of doctors.

Therefore, it seems to me that these liberals who cry for 'universal health care' have got it all wrong. I see no reason to place hardships on ordinary Americans to provide care for all. If people wish health care, they will pay for it, or their companies will pay for it. I personally have no problem paying fro my own and for my family's care. But I do not intend to pay for someone I do not know and who might even be here illegally. No where is it written that health care is a right. If one can afford it, one will pay for it. But there is no reason to force us to pay for those who will not pay for themselves.

On Hiatus

I will be on hiatus as far as posting goes for at least a week due to personal issues arising. it seems I have a medical condition that will require surgery, thus the enforced leave of abesence. Until I return, I recommend the following blogs and sites for your daily reading consumption:

Michelle Malkin

Power Line

Captain's Quarters

Hugh Hewitt

Mentok

Expat-Leo

Washington Times

National Review Online

Victor Davis Hanson

Weekly Standard

These are good places to start. Avoid the New York Times unless you really like deceiving and disingenuous 'reporting'. I shall return as soon as possible. Until then, be seeing you.....

Rules to Debate By

Courtesy of a friend at the office, here are some of the best debate guidelines I have seen in quite some time. Sincere thanks to Edward Houston for contributing these rules and also for permitting me to re-post them here:


Seven Rules to Follow if you want to have a Political Discussion with Me 
 
1. Do not say that I am implying anything. I directly state what I mean and I will not avoid direct questions. Please do the same.
2. A statement of fact that is verifiable is not a racist. bigoted, or mean spirited statement. Theories as to why, how, and what can be done about it are subject to scrutiny of motive. But, a statement of fact is just that, a statement of fact.
3. Do not answer a question with another question. That is always to dodge the question asked or to change the subject when loosing ground. You will have your turn to ask direct questions and get direct answers. Stay on subject.
4. Be civil and polite. If you can’t discuss a mater without profanity laced ranting or talking over me, it doesn’t matter how enlightening your viewpoint is. Just go away, I don’t want to talk to you.
5. If this is an issue that you are so emotional about that you can’t help violating rule #4, then go away too. I’m sorry. Even if you feel your emotions are justified, it just doesn’t work. You can’t have a productive and honest discussion that way.
6. When I say most of group X does Y, please do not waist my time trotting out the 2% or 3% that are the exception. There will always be exceptions to the rule and it is possible that you or I may become one someday. You do the best you can for the exceptions but society, as a whole has to come first.
7. There are some yes or no questions and you know what they are. Is it wrong to steal, is it wrong to murder, etc?  If you can’t answer a yes or no question without a “but”, then get your “but” away. 


It seems to me that if more folks on both sides of the ideological spectrum, especially the Left, could follow these dictums, we would perhaps have a more courteous arena for discussion and debate. Anger and outrageous accusations do not a good case for debate make.

Good for John Cornyn...

...since he appears to be one of the few GOP senators in Washington DC who takes his responsibility seriously For those of you who have been following the Taliban Man at Yale story (see HERE, HERE and HERE for more background information), Senator Cornyn wrote a strongly-worded letter to Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff requesting more information about the circumstances that led to the former Taliban ambassador being admitted to Yale University. He also reminded Secretary Chertoff that there is a law on the books strictly forbidding people like Taliban Man from even being admitted to the United States. My question- which part of 'homeland security' does the Secretary's department not understand?

Now if only more members of Congress would take their responsibilities as seriously as Senator Cornyn, instead of posturing in front of inadvertently self-revealing signage, perhaps we would be able to move toward winning the PR part of this war against Islam as well as the military part, which is well under control.

Old Media 'Courage'

So I see the Salon's online magazine has posted 279 photographs from the Abu Ghraib prison. Naturally, these photographs focus only on the misdemeanors performed by a small group of US soldiers. There is no mention of the true atrocities that occurred in Abu Ghraib prior to the US invasion and subsequent freeing of the political prisoners and rape victims who had previously populated said prison. Nor is there any mention that the prisoners so subjected are specifically excepted from protection by the Geneva Convention and are themselves guilty of crimes far worse than posing naked in dog collars.

But of course, there is no place in Salon's breathless coverage of the 'human rights disaster' for any sort of context. So I shall attempt to provide some, since the 'professional journalists' of Salon either cannot or more likely, will not do so. Yes, what occurred at Abu Ghraib was out of line. However, let us remember that the US military was already investigating the crimes that occurred there, and that the NY Times' so-called scoop was in actuality a scoop from the very military that the Times reporters tried so hard in their story to criminalize and denigrate. Let us also remember that all persons who participated in said events have now been found guilty and will be spending significant amounts of time in military prisons. And just for fun, recall that until the US invasion of Iraq, Human Rights Watch had estimated that roughly 50,000 Iraqis per year were killed- first tortured then killed, by their own government. How many Iraqis have died in torture chambers under US governance? If there have been any, even the anti-American MSM have yet to discover it.

And while we are on the subject, let's talk a little about what constitutes a 'human rights disaster'. Salon claims that this is 'horrifying humiliation and abuse', but they don't seem to have a problem with Westerners being held in captivity with none of the amenities granted the Abu Ghraib captive, and ultimately being beheaded on TV for the amusement of al-Jazeera television. Salon has no problem apparently with that. Nor does Salon appear to have a problem with the world-wide mistreatment of non-Muslims by Muslims. Where have been the breathless declarations of human rights disasters regarding Darfur, or East Timor? Perhaps when Christians are abused by Muslims, the Salon-ites are pleased? Or maybe they simply don't consider this to be a human rights problem. After all, it's only those horrible Christians. They must be guilty, unlike these innocent little Muslims. After all, the Christians had it coming- they are not Muslim after all, and only Muslims are persecuted. I regret that that sounds suspiciously like Salon's thought process. And as for their so-called courage in publishing these disgusting pictures, they have refused to even print the 'Muhammad' cartoon- supposedly in sympathy with the feelings of the Muslim world. Nor will they show the equally horrifying images of the slaughter wreaked by Muslims on innocent Americans and others on September 11, 2001.

Where were those feelings when Hussein and his despicable offspring were comporting themselves in secret rape rooms? Where was the sympathy when Christians protested about their sacred images being profaned? Apparently Salon, like most of the MSM, have only a one-sided sympathy. I will believe the journalists' protestations of courage and even-handedness when I see an American media organ publish the 9/11 pictures and video, or even publish the Muhammad cartoons. Until then, they are merely poseurs who dare to publish only material that they know will bring no response. Abu Ghraib is over two years old. Precisely what value, other than re-inflaming our Muslim enemies, does re-publishing do? Or maybe that is their goal- they WANT the US to lose this war? Well, I have a message to the 'brave' folks at Salon, and one that they would do well to remember when they are living in dhimmitude and being executed for homosexuality- be careful what you wish for. If you keep on undermining your own culture, you might just get what you want. I hope you enjoy it. For myself, I would rather go down fighting than live in dhimmitude.

hat tip to Matt Drudge.

Modern Music and MC Hammer

Well, it appears that as Expat-Leo says, Expat Leo's Blogroll: APOCALYPSE: MC Hammer has a blog.. This is a relevant issue for me to post a rant about modern music.....not that Hammer was ever a true musician. His genius was strictly in appropriating other (real) musicians' beats and then putting on a good show with hot, scantily-clad women weaving across the stage while he executed his own choreographed 'dance' moves. Needless to say that he stole the beats without due credit from well-known songs by real musicians, who, though I cannot appreciate their music, at least did make their own. The problem with pop 'music' today is that it is derivative, and highly unmusical. not to mention that today's 'singers', unlike their forbears, ccan neither sing nor create anything of value....

If one listens to the caterwauling that passes for singing as voiced by Britney Spears or any of her many imitations, one cannot find any trace of the grace and beauty that once passed for singing as voiced by Sarah Vaughn, Lena Horne, Peggy Lee, or the great Ella Fitzgerald. Even lesser singing talents such as Doris Day possessed more talent and style in their little fingers than do any of the current generation. These so-called 'artists' bring to mind the infamous 'talents' of Japan- young, attractive women who briefly enjoy a show-biz career before they are eclipsed by others identical to them in every respect save only age. Younger is better. These so-called 'talents' (so-named because they lack any vestige of talent) fade rapidly into oblivion, occasionally surfacing years later as late-night talk-show hostesses or on the gossip pages of housewife magazines.

As for the men, there is nothing even remotely resembling Nat King Cole, Frank Sinatra, or Bing Crosby. Who today among the male 'singers' has a modicum of talent? Whose name resounds among audiences? The closest would be a Paul McCartney or a Billy Joel- neither of whom are truly talented singers. Their gift of music is real, however, and at least they make real music, as opposed to the disgusting words and derivative rhythms found in rap.

My compadre Expat-Leo suggests that I throw something in about the evils of the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America), but as a former recording musician (yes, I have played a number of recording gigs), I have sympathy for the RIAA. Their tactics may be reprehensible and are undoubtedly needlessly heavy-handed, but they are ultimately in the right. The file-sharers or file-stealers, on the other hand, are in the wrong. If a band wants to release their work for free, that is of course their own choice. and for those who truly have talent, they might as well, since sooner or later, they will be noticed. However, for the vast majority of the current 'artists' the RIAA is a necessary evil. Musicians no longer have a powereful organization to fight their battles collectively, other than the RIAA. As musicians, we lost THAT battle back in the 1940s, unfortunately. The union won the battle and lost the war....

The Hubris of 'The Dan'

I have been somewhat remiss in not reporting on this story, but it puts the character of Dan Rather and most of the other members of the Imperial Media into sharp perspective. As it turns out, Dan Rather gave a speech in Cherry Hill, New Jersey on Monday the 13th. He spoke on the decline of the media, and repeatedly claimed that "What's gone out of fashion is the tough question and the follow up".

Fair enough. A local journalist who was present at Dan's speech, one Jim Walsh, of the local Courier, decided that Dan's complaints deserved a question of their own. So he asked about The Dan's own credibility, specifically referencing The Dan's infamous attempt to sabotage a Presidential election with faked documents. Although The Dan reluctantly answered the original question, he cut off Mr. Walsh's microphone when Walsh attempted to follow up. And the audience, I should add, booed Wlash, accusing him of 'having an agenda' when he approached the microphone.

So it seems that instead of reporters lacking the courage to ask the tough questions and follow up, reporters (at least among the national-press crowd) would prefer to sit in their own little unhinged echo chamber. As for The Dan's hypocritical comments about asking tough questions, I don't recall any member of the national media ever giving a Republican President a pass. Only Democrats receive easy questions from media personnel. And until reporters like The Dan can answer tough questions, I don't think they have any right to complain about the state of the media. After all, it is they who created the lack of trust they currently face.

Hat tip to Captain's Quarters.

Hillary and the 'Police State'

Hillary Clinton is complaining. According to the Boston Globe, she says that the Bush Administration is creating a police state to round up illegal immigrants. And what exactly is wrong with that, Senator? To refresh- the reason these people are called illegal aliens is because they are here, well, illegally. And we should be rounding these people up and shipping them back to wherever they came from. They do not have a right to break our laws and expect us to welcome them with open arms- especially considering the devastation that they cause. Remember that the Governor of Arizona, like Hillary a Democrat, recently called out the National Guard to keep these folks out, and to protect her constituents from the damage and danger they bring with them.

I am not against immigration. I am in fact married to a legal immigrant. She had to pass through all kinds of legal hoops in order to gain her legal status (which were completely unrelated to our marriage). She is now a legal resident of this great country. She is also a working professional and a contributor to this country- she is a registered nurse. That is the kind of immigrant that we should be trying to attract. However, most illegal immigrants do not fit in that category. Most are people who can't make it in their own countries, and who are admittedly the very dregs of society. In my opinion, there is absolutely nothing wrong with enforcing some of the laws that are already on the books to keep these undesirables out. And if that upsets the Senator, maybe she ought to spend a little less time in Martha's Vineyard and more time in the border communities that are devastated by these illegal aliens- places like New Mexico, Arizona, Texas, and California.

But to complain that the Bush Administration is 'creating a police state'???? I can only wish that this were true. In fact, I regret to say that the Bush Administration has been reprehensibly lax in enforcing security at our porous borders. They are even proposing yet another thinly-disguised amnesty for these law-breakers. I was over at a nearby hardware store and I saw large numbers of these illegals lurking in the parking lot waiting for under-the-table work. This can and should be stopped as soon as possible. Why should we reward illegals for breaking the first law- illegal entry? Legal immigrants are always welcome. But illegals should be arested and deported wherever found.

In fact, I would propose that when an illegal is apprehended, he/she is immediately put to work for one dollar a day for one year at whatever job the arresting county/city needs done. That dollar a day will be cahrged to their keep. At the end of that year, they will be deported with no money back to wherever they came from. Should they be re-apprehended, that time in labor will double. The propsepct of hard work with no pay might keep some of these folks from breaking our laws, since it iss the money that attracts them. As a corrolary, we need to crack down on the illegal employers. Let'ss start with the farmers, then look at the ethnic restaurants. How many illegals are working in Mexican/Thai/Chinese restaurants? When I was in college, half of my Chinese friends were illegally employed in ethnic restaurants. That is a prime place to crack down. In conclusion, we have the right to police our own borders, and if the rest of the world (particularly Mexico and the rest of Latin America) can't put their own house in order, that is no reason to expect us to take in their undesirables simply so that their power elite can maintain their high positions.

When the Letter of the Law Trumps Common Sense...

...it is time to re-examine the law. Or maybe just replace narrow-minded officials who can't see beyond their own lack of common sense. According to the Tampa Tribune, the wife of an Army man who is currently in Iraq, faces fines of up to $100 per day for displaying a 'Support Our Troops' sign in front of her house. The reason for this? The homeowners' association where she lives prohibits all signs other than 'For Sale' or 'For Rent' in front of their homes in their association.

This strikes me as ridiculous. Event though the Homeowners' Association leader, himself an Army reservist, claims that if they allowed this, there would be nothing to stop people putting up negative signs, I disagree. Pro-American, patriotic signs should be above reproach. And if they insist on applying the law strictly, there is nothing stopping them from making a permanent exception to this type of banner.

The saddest part, to me, is that there has been no outcry from any of the supposedly pro-Free Speech organizations in this country. The ACLU and other groups that will fight to the death for pornography or anti-American speech are nowhere to be found. Nor is the so-caled Mainstream Media apparently interested in this apparent abuse of the First Amendment. Now, can anyone imagine if this had been an anti-American sign? The ACLU would have been on the scene, together with members of the Exempt Media in seconds. But because these organizations disagree with this message, they will not take up the fight for pro-American speech, thus displaying how morally bankrupt they truly are. For shame!

Hat tip to Matt Drudge.

Attention: Product Designers

it appears that product designers are not designing for average people, but for some mythical SuperConsumer. According to a thesis published by a Netherlands graduate student, fully half of all malfunctioning products returned by consumers are actually in perfect working order- their owners simply couldn't figure out how to use and/or set them up correctly! Acccording to the Reuters report, the graduate student found that the average consumer in the United States, for example, will only spend twenty minutes trying to get a gadget to work before giving up and returning it.

This should be a wake-up call to consumer product companies such as Sony, Philips, Logitech and others. Increasingly steep learning curves mean increasingly disgruntled customers if the companies do not provide adequate instructions. Coupled with the tendency to delete hard-copies of the manuals, this almost guarantees high numbers of returns. Perhaps these high-powered product designers might think about the reaction of the average consumer, instead of assuming a high degree of technical competency for their prospective customers?

An American Spaceplane?

The magazine Aviation Week & Space Technology is reporting that the United States may be mothballing a two-stage spaceplane system that may have been designed to replace the famed SR-71 Blackbird. According to the article, the spaceplane was probably designed during the 1980s and made operational during the 1990s. Why it is being retired, like its very existence, is shrouded in mystery, but the magaizine suggests that it is probably either for cost or performance reasons.

The article admits that there is no hard evidence that the system even exists, but offers some fairly strong circumstantial evidence. While it is very tempting to take this article with a large grain of salt, if the plane actually does exist, it would explain why the Pentagon was willing to kill the Blackbird, and also why they aparently are not too (publicly) worried over the impending end of the shuttle program as well. That being said, if this program exists, and if it is now being mothballed, the question is- do they already have a replacement? Captain Ed thinks so, and I agree with him. Despite the pathological leakinesess of the US government, we (hopefully) still have a FEW secrets. And this one would be a doozy.

Hat tip to Captain Ed Morissey.

CORRECTION: The magazine is called Aviation Week and Space Technology. My mistake on initally (and erroneously) identifying it as Aviation Weekly. Thanks to Expat Leo for the correction.

Air America Update

So it appears that Air America, after all their legal shenanigans, and their little attempts to hide the source (or lack thereof) of their finances, is about to lose their flagship New York station. All I have to say about THAT story is- it couldn't have happened to a more deserviing group of folks. And the MSM STILL have not deigned to cover this story. Now imagine this was a conservative radio network.....

Free Speech 1, Law Schools 0

The Supreme Court today finally ended the nation's law schools' attempt to muzzle free speech, ruling unanimously that colleges that accept federal funds must allow military recruiters on campus. This is a blow to leftists' attempts to silence speech with which they disagree, and also shows how dependent law schools (and most other universitites as well) have become on federal money. (It also shows that the law schools are far out of step with mainstream America on the issue of the military. And these are the people teaching young legal minds? No wonder the legal profession leans so far left- and is so reviled by most Americans.)

The particular point at issue was the Solomon Amendment, which dictates that any school that accepts federal funds must allow military recruiters on campus. Law schools had protested that this violates their freedom of speech, but the Supreme Court scotched that laughable attempt at defense, pointing out that nothing in the amendment restricts the law schools ability to say anything. It merely forces them to allow speech with which they disagree. The Court ruled unanimously, with even far-left Justices like the sleepy Justice Ginsburg agreeing that the law schools didn't have a leg to stand on.

My question is why this piece of legal pestilence was even allowed to get to the Supreme Court? Aren't there any judges who understand the law in the lower courts? And isn't it interesting that the Left, which fancies itself the protector of free speech, only fights for speech with which they agree? Who are the censors now?

Hillary and Dubai

Hillary Clinton, who famously offered herself as a 'co-president' when her husband Bill occupied the White House, and who was responsible for one of Clinton's worst policy attempts, the Communist-inspired 'Hillarycare' initiative. apparently doesn't want her husband as a 'co-Senator'.

Over the weekend, according to MSNBC, she claimed that she was unaware of Bill's role in advising the Dubai company that is attempting to take over the management of six major US ports. Since she has been one of the most out-spoken opponents of the deal, this strikes me a cynical at best, and a flat-out lie at worst. She and Bill are still married (at least in name), and to try to convince us that she is totally unaware that Bill was the main advisor (for which he is being paid roughly 1.6 million dollars) is political hypocrisy at its most blatant.

In addition to her hypocrisy, her stand strikes me a political maneuvering and I suspect that she simply didn't believe that the Press, who have spent countless millions trying to promote and help her (as-yet unnanounced) campaign for the Presidency, wouold actually expose what she and Bill had cooked up. I am positive that she was to be the stern security-minded Senator while Bill was the bread-winner in the deal. Anyone who thinks that 1.6 million would not end up in the Hillary-for-President fund is simply naive, based on the Clintons' past behavior. After all, they were even willing to take money from Communist China!

No, I fear that I cannot believe Senator Clinton's protestations. And in an interesting twist, even MSNBC has misgivings, writing "But former President Bill Clinton's ties to Dubai and the United Arab Emirates should not have come as a surprise to his New York senator wife." Maybe is more media sources had had misgivings about the political operations of the Clintons earlier, we would have been spared the scandals of the Clinton Administration. But that would have required the Press to actually honestly report on the Clintons and the Democratic Party- something that they are seemingly unable to do.

Rivalry Time!

I am a University of North Carolina fan. No, I wasn't born in North Carolina, I have never lived there and never even set foot in the state. However, I have been a North Carolina Tar Heel basketball fan since I was old enough to watch the games and understand what was happening out there. As of tomorrow, Carolina will meet their arch-rival, Duke University, for what I believe is the 219th time. Despite Duke's recent dominance, North Carolina leads the all-time series 124-95, though Duke has finally taken the lead in games played in Durham, 47-42. Tomorrow's game will be played at Duke, in Durham, North Carolina. UNC resides at Chapel Hill, also in North Carolina.

Many writers, sportscasters and pundits consider this the greatest rivalry in college basketball. While I am not entirely sure, I would defintely agree that records are usually menaingless when these two teams meet. And it is usually a good game. If you can ignore the annoying and shameless histrionics of the blatant Duke-promoter Dick Vitale, most of the announcers and personnel involved in the game usually live up to expectations.

For a hilarious look at how we fans feel about the rivalry, Alston Ramsey has a wonderful article at National Review on the Carolina-Duke rivalry. Read the whole thing. And then watch the game tomorrow. Ah, I love the smell of rivalry in the morning.....

UPDATE: It appears that Duke senior guard JJ Redick, over whom the East Coast media have fawned all year, is actually mortal. Carolina forced him into a 5-21 shooting perfromance- on his senior day. On the same day, UNC freshman forward Tyler Hansbrough went off for 27 points, 10 rebounds and got Duke senior center Sheldon Williams into foul trouble. Final score: Duke 76, North Carolina 83. Hurrah!

More on Schools...

I posted yesterday on the evils of teachers who overstep their areas of expertise. But what about school districts, who, in their continuing search to make schools 'friendly environments' for everyone, have begun intruding into what students do off-campus and in their own time.

A report by the AP says that 20 student in Costa Mesa, California were suspended merely for viewing another student's MySpace in which he made threats against a fellow student. As for the student wwho created the posting, the local police are apparently trying to charge the kid with a hate crime, and the district wants to expel him.

This is all very amusing to me. Teachers can apparently accuse our nation and our elected President of war crimes and even conduct mock trials of the same President during school hours without the charge of 'hate crime' being hurled, but let a middle-schooler make disparaging or threatening comments against a fellow student, and it's a 'hate crime'?

According to the report, the student in question made comments like "Who here in the (group name) wants to take a shotgun and blast her in the head over a thousand times?" I remember in middle school that there were many of my fellow student whom I loathed (and who probably loathed me), and probably would cheerfully have beat the living daylights out of. Several of the girls were the worst offenders. Althought we couldn't hit girls, we certainly made many disparaging comments, and sometimes daydreamed about beating them up as well. I also recall that after-school fights among the guys were always arranged to take place in the park near our school so that the school could not stop them.

In this case, I am not defending the student in question. He made ssome stupid and completely irresponsible comments. However, I think that the district is over-reacting, and the police should butt out. This is a case of a kid, on his own time, focusing his aggression and relieving his stress. His parents should absolutely be ashamed for not taking action, but the school district and the police have no business being involved.

As for the remainder of the students, their only crime is viewing the offending comments. Whatever happend to the principle of free speech? This speech is definitely offiensive, but these students merely viewed it. On their own time and off campus. What gives the schools the authority to punish students for actions performed off-campus? I don't ever recall awards being given for acheivements that were executed off-campus. Those took place 'out of the school's jurisdiction'. So what give the district the right to punish students once they leave school?

School districts exist to teach students the basics- a job at which entirely too many off them are failing miserably. They have no business getting into their students' lives once they leave campus. If these activities occur on campus, then they have every right to become involved. But not off-campus. That is the job of a parent- not a school administrator. School adminstrators apparently have a lot of free time. Instead of pursuing these PC nany-state objectives, maybe they should use some of it to find out why so many of their students are 'graduating' with such abysmal skillsets as in the Florida aritcle linked. Maybe that would even justify their lofty salaries....

Hat tip to Matt Drudge.

Teaching Politics

It appears that the teaching profession has forgotten what they are being paid to do- and who they are being paid by. According to the Channel 9 News in Aurora Colorado, following President Bush's State of the Union speech a geography teacher made comments in a lecture that compared George Bush to Adolph Hitler. Leaving aside the complete inappropriateness of the comparison, what expertise does a geography teacher have to comment on a political occurrence? And how does the teacher's personal opinion relate to a lecture in any event? Fortunately, a student recorded the comments and the teacher is now on leave. Even the school district admits that it appears the teacher acted inappropriately.

However, that is not the only incident of late involving teachers speaking outside of their areas of competence. In another story, this one filed by the Morris County Daily Record newspaper, it appears that the teachers at Parsipanny High School in Morris County, New Jersey feel themselves qualified to hold a mock 'international war crimes trial' accusing President Buch of comitting 'crimes against civilian populations' and 'inhumane treatment of prisoners'. According to the Daily Record, the panel judging the case includes 'two English teachers, one history teacher, a guidance counselor and someone from the school's media department...'. So English teachers somehow have competence to decide this case? A 'person from the media department' has competency? and the inclusion of a 'guidance counselor' has me laughing. As if guidance counselors have any expertise in this area. The only member who possibly might have some expertise would be the history teacher.

Since one of the charges is 'crimes against civilian populations' I wonder when they will think to try Joseph Stalin? Or possibly Mao Tse-Tung? Or even 'gasp' Fidel Castro, all of whom have committed real crimes against (their own) civilian populations. They might even cast their glance at a more recent dictator, one Saddam Hussein, currently being tried for real by his former subjects. The US invasion of Iraq removed a dictator who killed and raped his own population. That no longer occurs, and there is a burgeoning democracy in the former dictatorship. The rape rooms are gone and most Iraqis feel that things are getting better. As for the charge of mistrating enemy prisoners, I wonder if these bleeding hearts have noted that while US detainees are housed in comfortable cells, regularly fed and even given their own prayer rugs, detainees of the Muslims we are fighting receive no such amenities and usually end by being beheaded. And there is one other small difference. US detainees were captured on the battlefield, without proper uniform and they are specifically exempt from the Geneva Code. They are in fact entitled to none of the amenities that US soldiers are giving them. However, the detainees of the Muslims are usually journalists, or other private citizens who really are non-combatants.

However, these incidents clearly point out two things- that teachers increasingly are injecting their own biases into subjects about which they know very little, and that the liberal establishment appears to be grasping desperately for any straw that will allow them to somehow promote their agenda, and indoctrinate the youth. If you are an English teacher, what training have you had in international relations? What expertise do you have in the diplomatic arena? And what knowledge, if any, do you posess that allows you to pontificate on the science of warfare? As for 'guidance counselors', what expertise do you have in any of these areas? Have you ever served in a position that would give you the insight or knowledge to accurately analyze political events? The answer is alsmot certainly not. So where do you get off setting yourself up as an expert? That appears to be false advertising to me.

These people seem to think that expertise in one area, makes them experts in others as well. However, speaking as one who holds graduate degrees in History, I can assure them that it does not. I would not presume to opine in the arena of science, physics, or other arcane disciplines in which I posess no special skills or knowledge. These people should show similar restraint. A degree in English or Education does not make one an expert in History, archaeology, politics, diplomacy or warfare. Journalists, who are similarly lacking in these skills also make this mistake. However, they at least are being paid to write thier mindless pap. Teachers have no such excuse for blathering on regarding subjects in which they posess no knowledge.

There is absolutely no excuse for either of these cases. Teachers, teach your subjects and stay out of the political arena. If you are a political science or social studies or history teacher, then you might have some excuse for discussing (in a strictly neutral manner) political events. However, there is never an excuse for attempting to force your own biases and prejudices onto impressionable children or young adults. These cases demonstrate why parents need more insight and control over what is being taught in the classroom. Teachers simply are not trustworthy- especially considering the liberals' stranglehold on the public educational system. If you do not support your President, that is one thing. But this is walking the line of treason and sedition, and it needs to be stopped. Now.

Hat tip to Matt Drudge.

Disloyal Opposition

When the Left claims to 'support the troops but not the mission', when the Left accuses their opponents of questioning their patriotism when Americans question their actual support for their own country, we have been increasingly cynical regarding their hypocritical and self-serving partisan protests. However, a new website seems to indicate that said questioning of the Left's patriotism is not only justified, but mandatory for those of us who actually believe in defending our country from violent and undemocratic revolutionaries such as those named below. The following organizations I hereby declare, based on their own words and deeds, to be anti-American and unpatriotic:

Code Pink
Communist Party of America
People for the American Way
Amnesty International
Human RIghts Watch
American Civil Liberties Union

...and of course- the United Nations.

There are other groups, but these stand out to me, as they have long been in the forefront of the attempt to take American away from Americans who believe differently from them. They hold patriotism, religion, duty, honor and loyalty in low regard, and worship only power and ideology- an ideology that a small minority of Americans actually share.

These groups stand condemned out of their own mouths, as their willing presence on the steering committee of an organization called United for Peace and Justice demonstrates. I think it is put best by the admirable Captain Ed:

Freedom of speech and assembly are the closest we come to unfettered rights in the United States; we do not tolerate limits on either unless necessary for keeping the peace. However, one of the limitations accepted by almost everyone is a ban on overthrowing the elected government through force, both in action and in rhetoric. The rally being organized by the group United For Peace And Justice appears to approach that limitation, if it doesn't actually cross it entirely

I agree. This UFPJ, and the groups who asssociate with it, have branded themselves traitors to the United States of America. As they themselves say:

Storm the White House
Multi-Day Event, Beginning March 15, come when you can and stay as long as you can - we are taking over the White House until they leave.
Wednesday, March 15th 2006 12:00 AM
Washington, DC USA

TAKE THE WHITE HOUSE BY STORM - Stop Genocide, Torture and Occupation

U.N. SOS - We need your help to end the reign of international criminals.

It is our duty and the duty of the United Nations to rescue the people of the world from the U.S. dictators. Murder for occupation and theft of land is illegal. Murder of journalists is criminal. Remove the traitors who have stolen the U.S. budget and used it to commit international crimes against humanity.

Forgive me if I find it hard to take their complaints seriously. These were the people and organizations who were silent when the Nazis were killing innocent Jews (until the Soviet Union was attacked). They were silent in the face of the Chinese and Soviet Communist massacres. They were silent and unconcerned about Saddam Hussein's rape rooms in Iraq. They show no concern over the massacre of Christians by Muslims in Indonesia and Africa (in Timor and Sudan respectively). They showed no sympathy for the victims of Che Guevara and Fidel Castro. Nor do they seem to care about the plight of the democracy advocates even today in real dictatorships such as Cuba, Venezuela and China. They cry about imagined slights to Islam but give not a thought to the millions of non-Muslims who dare not even practice their own religions in Saudi Arabia or Bahrain. They cavorted with Idi Amin without a thought for his millions of victims. And they are seemingly unconcerned with the attempts by Iran's mullahs to become nuclear and export their global jihad against the West to this country. However, they consider the twice-elected (and the second time with a clear majority of the popular vote- something that their revered Bill Clinton never managed) Chief Executive of the United States of America and his Administration to be 'criminal'?

It has been said that actions speak louder than words, but in this case, the words and actions of these groups have for a long time been aimed at the destruction of the United States. This latest foray merely strengthens my belief that the dormant laws on treason and sedition need to be applied. Not al speech is protected, and this kind of speech is defintely among that which is not. Calling for the overthrow of an elected and democratic government in a nation that lives by the rule of law likie the US is the very definition of treason. Where is the FBI when we need them? We have a disloyal opposition, and we have laws to deal with that. Maybe a long stretch in prison for treason or sedition might bring these traitors to their senses. Speech has consequences.

Hat tips to Captain Ed and Michelle Malkin.

Marching toward dhimmitude

Since the 'Mainstream' news media (especially the craven New York Times, have refused to run any of the famous Muhammad cartoons, they have little right to chide others for their supposed intolerance. However, since the Times HAS chided Christians for their outrage at the media's desecration of their own religion on a number of occcasions - most recently when they republished the atrocious dun-covered Virgin Mary 'art', one would at least expect some realization of what this whole cartoon incident has been about from the beginning.

And the Times does not disappoint. The so-called Paper of Record predictably, recognizes what the controversy is in fact about, but refuses to actually take a principled stand against the murderous Islamic intimidators. I think Captain Ed Morissey puts it best, writing:

Don't be fooled by this editorial. It signifies something worse than the pusillanimity shown earlier -- the Times admits they understand the stakes involved, and yet refuse to stand up to the Islamists anyway.

In contrast to the wannabe-dhimmi NY Times, the inestimable Mark Steyn gets it absolutely right, connecting the dots as he writes,

What, in the end, are all these supposedly unconnected matters from Danish cartoons to the murder of a Dutch filmmaker to gender-segregated swimming sessions in French municipal pools about? Answer: sovereignty. Islam claims universal jurisdiction and always has. The only difference is that they're now acting upon it.

It would be nice if the supposedly so-courageous American MSM (and a good portion of Europe) would pause in their rush toward dhimmitude to consider what it is they are in such a hurry to embrace.

Hat tip to Michelle Malkin and Captain Ed Morissey.

Ingratitude - Revisited

In an earlier post, I discussed the crass ingratitude of the South Korean people. They were saved from a brutal dictatorship that to this day dominates their kinsfolk trapped in the North only through the sacrifice of thousands of American (and other Western powers') troops. Yet they are now so indoctrinated by the incessant propaganda spouted forth from the Dear Leader's communist heaven that it appears that almost half of soon-to-be-voter-aged South Korean youths say that their country should side with the North if the US attacks the Communist dictatorship.

In an amusing sidelight, it appears that 54 percent say that peaceful reunification was the preferred method of ending the division of the Korean Peninsula. I would be interested in their definition of 'peaceful'. I am certain that the Dear Leader would agree that if the US merely stepped out of the way, theree could be 'peace'. Peace with his leadership that is. And it appears that there are plenty of useful idiots in South Korea who would allow him to waltz in wihtout a fight.

Remind me again- why are we spending American money and troops protecting these ingrates? If they want to rejoin the North 'peacefully' so badly, why not let them have it? They can discover the error of their ways without subsidation from the United States. And if they actually lived under the Dear Leader, they might learn that yes, there ARE some things worth fighting for. Some things that the US, almost alone among nations, still has the will-power to stand up and fight for, despite their so-nuanced views.

Hat tip to Matt Drudge.

More from the Religion of Peace

According to Yahoo! News, Nigerian Muslims protesting the Muhammad cartoons burned churches and attacked Christians yesterday. This is not the first time that this has occurred (there are constant attacks by Muslims on Christians without any Muhammad cartoons being involved), but I note that not one media organization correctly categorised these as religious-based attacks. These would probably be categorized as hate crimes if a Christian group did anything remotely similar to this. When will the MSM notice that their protestations of peacefulness regarding Islam ring remarkably hollow, belied by the actions of Muslims themselves around the world. For that matter, when will the MSM choose to cover the persecution that Muslims routines apply to anyone who is so unfortunate as to live in areas where Islam is the dominant religion. Muslims are free to practice their beliefs in almost any Christian country. Can you think of any Muslim society where Christians are equally free to practice THEIR beliefs?

And on a related note, when will the non-Muslim nations of the world wake up and remember their history- Islam has invaded virtually every non-Muslim nation/culture on Earth multiple times in an attempt to conquer and bring all the world's peoples under their bloody and backward religion. In comparison, Christianity has never tried to conquer the world by the edge of their sword. When will the world wake up and put their foot down on Islam's dreams of domination once and for all? It needs to happen. And soon.

Hat tip to Glenn Reynolds.

Revisiting the Muhammad Cartoons

I have been remiss. In view of the manufactured and trumped up anger of the so-called 'Muslim street' over the famous Muhammed cartoons, I would like to remind our cowardly Mainstream media (none of whom have the intestinal fortitude to publish the actual Muhammad cartoons) of the following:

1) The United States is NOT a Muslim country
2) We are NOT bound by sharia, thank the good Lord Jesus Christ
3) Mulim prohibitions are meaningless to non-Muslims such as we (mostly) are
4) Muslims torture, behead and otherwise mistreat Christians and other non-Muslims who are so unfortunate as to live in their territory. I don't recall our cowardly mavens of the MSM worrying about THEIR feelings as they desecrate Christianity
5) Muslims who live in the United States may wish to observe sharia, but sharia does not supercede the Constitution of the United States
6) Non-Muslims who live in the United States are free to speak their minds and draw occasionally unflattering depictions of the prophet Muhammad whether Muslims like it or not
7) The Press' newfound 'understanding of religious feelings' certainly does not extend to Christians of any denomination (see the NY Times' recent and entirely unnecessary re-depiction of the Virgin Mary smeared in dung). Either extend this courtesy to all religions or drop the pretense

In view of the above and due to the boundless cowardice of our self-appointed Imperial Media (thanks to Rich Lowry of the National Review Online for the description of the Washington Press corps) I have decided to provide the original drawings published by the Jyllands-Posten newspaper in Denmark. Judge for yourself if these cartoons are worth the rage that Islam and their useful idiots in the West are directing at them.

Below are the original cartoons as published on September 30, 2005

Gored by the MSM

I am very belated in discussing this story, but I am still in a state of disbelief at how the MSM has completely ignored the seditious and near-treasonous remarks uttered by former Vice-President Al Gore on Saudi soil last week.

In their haste to mock and attack the current V-P, Richard Cheney for his hunting accident, they have wilfully ignored a much more serious issue- that of US politicians with serious ambitions to make statements that can only be construed as anti-American at the least. While this issue has been covered at length by far more influential and better-informed commentators such as Hugh hewitt, Micehelle Malkin and Edward Morissey, I would like to say that I find this deliberate ignotring of the issue by the vast majority of our self-elected press elites to be disgraceful.

Isn't this the kind of news that the media exists to cover? But instead, they are busy throwing a juvenile temper tantrum over the 14-hour delay in notifying them of the Texas accident. This is merely more evidence that the Washington Press corps is an institution that may have outlived its usefulness.

Even the Dems Can Get One Right...

...if only for cheap partisan reasons. I see that the Democrats are planning a bill to block the purchase of port services in several major US ports by a Dubai gvernment-owned company.

My reaction is an immediate 'GOOD!'. While I still do not believe that the Democrats are serious about security, I don't think that the Bush Administration is either knowledgable or serious about border control either and this is merely another example of it. Having American ports controlled by a non-US company from a region which has already demonstrated extreme hostility to America and American interests is a very bad decision in my opinion. Hopefully President Bush will come to his senses and use his Presidential authority to block this proposed purchase before it goes any further.

Both Michelle Malkin and Ed Morissey are on top of this story, as usual. Where is the MSM?

Hat tip to Matt Drudge.

the MSM, in Perspective

The inestimable Michelle Malkin nails the hypocrisy and narcissistic nature of our wonderful american Mainstream media in her article today in the Jewish World Review. As she writes:

In Calgary, Canada, the publishers of the Jewish Free Press and Western Standard magazine face civil lawsuits by local Muslims for publishing the cartoons. In Jordan and Algeria, a total of four other journalists face trial for publishing the cartoons. The original cartoonists have been targeted by Islamic terrorist groups and are in hiding.

Yet, here we are, as embassies blaze and editors cower in fear and radical imams ululate against the West, watching our esteemed media go Looney Tunes over an isolated hunting accident.

Who do you think will have the last laugh?

The saddest part is that while partisan hacks like Dana Milbank pontificate about matters on which they have little or no expertise, knowledgable critics such as Malkin are ignored. Remember Casssandra? I fear that thanks to the proliferation of blind Narcissists in our media, we may be facing a similar situation to the doomed warriors of Troy. Let us hope that the Muslim Trojan Horse will at least be spotted by the alert watchers such as Malkin or Jed Babbin before the 'Mainstream' media accepts it without the slightest checks- kind of like their reporting....

About that EU Constitution.....

Nothing is sweeter than well-deserved revenge, or hoisting one's foes by their own petard. An article in the UK's Telegraph this morning pointed that out, stating that the EU is about to reap what they have sowed. Poetic justice indeed. Read the whole thing.

Hat tip to Matt Drudge.

Happy Valentine's Day

No posting yesterday, due to Saint Valentine. Hope that everyone had a very happy and romantic Valentine's Day with their loved one(s).

Iran Speaks Again

If Democrats and Leftists can cease their crying over the NSA program long enough to realise that the world is a dangerous place, more eveidence of this was provided this morning by the 'President' of Iran, who declared that Israel wouldd be removed. He then claimed that the Holocaust was a myth. Not a comforting interview for the Israelis, I would think, nor for their many suppoorters.

In a related story, the London Telegraph reported that the United States is preparing military means to put Iran out of the nuclear-weapons business for a long time. The Telegraph report says that the US is planning to use submarine-based missiles and aircraft to strike the targets within Iran.

My only reaction- Why didn't we start working on this one earlier? A nulear-armed Iran is not something that any American can look on with feelings of ease. Unless they are leftist or Democrats, of course! And can we please find a way to stop these idiotic newspapers from publishing our plans in time for our enemies to make themselves safer? Maybe we can't stop the journalists, who seem to have no feeling of loyalty unless it is to terrorists, btu we ought to at least be able to stop the leakers.

Conspiracy on the Left

I learned over the weekend that Vice-Presiden Richard Cheney accidentally shot one of his hunting companions, who is reported to be in very stable condition today. However, the fact that the shooting was an accident appears not to have registered to the leftist agitators on the DEmocratic Underground. Courtesy of David Gold's radio show on KSFO yesterday, I heard a representative sample of their venomous rants:

Some of the tame (reprintable) samples were along the lines of the following:

A poster who goes by the handle 'themartyred' wrote:

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

THIS OCCURRED YESTERDAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


JUST NOW COMING OUT???


HMMM, CAN ANYONE SAY, COVERUP! THEY WERE WAITING TO SEE IF HE DIED FIRST, TO PREVENT ANNOUNCING IT IF HE KILLED HIM.


CNN JUST ASKED, "WHY ARE WE HEARING THIS TODAY?", "NO IDEA" SAID THE REPORTER.


Another poster, who uses the handle 'bumblebee', wrote:

He probably killed the guy and it took them 24 hours to find a double...

Nothing would surprise me any more...

These individuals are hilarious. Of course, if they actually had an iota of comprehension about history or world affairs, they might not be so quick to turn on their own elected officials. Of course, these are the same folks who think Che Guevara is a hero- and wear T-shirts with that mass-murderer's face. Dreaming that someday they will bee able to set up their own little gulags, perhaps? After all, it is the Left who is known for being in bed with murderous dictators- Mao, Stalin, Che, Castro, etc. Therefore, i find these comments amusing in the extreme. And these folks think they should be leading our country? Scary....

Anti-Americanism in the West

Does the so-callled West have a death wish? I begin to think so, with the report from Yahoo News that Italy might put CIA agents on trial in absentia. This to me seems the height of absurdity.

According to the report, CAI agents kidnapped a terrorism suspect off the streewts of Milan. The prosecutors have asked the US for extradition but neither the US governemnt nor the Italian government has responded. To which I say- good for them. So the prosecutors are planning to try the CIA agents they claim planned the kidnapping in absentia.

This is another example of anti-American criminal justice systems trying to seive control of areas in which they have absolutely no extertise and no legal standing. These prosecutors are more concerned about the possibility that this terrorist might be questioned that by the strong possibility that he was planning attacks against them and their families. They are blinded by their anti-Americanism.

Like the criminal justice system here in the US, the Italian justice system should concentrate on criminal acts, not actions in a war by soldiers- even if they are the agency Europe loves to hate like the CIA. The Europeans ought to remember that if they succeed in finding the CIA men and women guilty, then the next time, their might not be any help when the Muslim terrorists crash their party. But if they wish to continue their blind march toward cultural suicide, i suppose that we will hagve to let them. Too bad. Europe once was a continent reknowned for its strength. Now it is known only for its fear and cowardice...

And so they blame the US

A recent report in the MyWay News site reported that Afghani protestors targeted a U.S. military base in response to the cartoons of Muhammad (that can be seen in their entirety HERE). Of course, the article's headline did not reflect that the protestors were in a southern Afghani province marked for it's instability and Taliban ties. That information was included in the body of the article, but someone merely reading the headline would have completely missed that vital information.

However, this does bring up the question of why this was considered front-page news. The fact that the Afghanis in that particular province are not particularly firendly to the US is not news. Annd the fact that the cartoons are being protested in violent ways aroudnt eh world is not news. This particular article sheds no light, and in fact merely aids the Muslim protestors in making their anger public. So what? According to one of the protestors, the United States "is the leader of Europe and the leading infidel in the world," said Sher Mohammed, a 40-year-old farmer who suffered a gunshot wound while taking part in the demonstration in the city of Qalat.
"They are all the enemy of Islam. They are occupiers in our country and must be driven out," Mohammed said.

WWho is an infiedl again? You would thin that the Press would remember that only if you accept Islams' idea that Muslims are the Chosen People that the rest of us are infidels. It is equally correct for those of us who are NOT Muslim to call Muslims infidels, and we would be correct. So why won't the Press accept that Christianity and Judaism or even Buddhism are equal tenets to Islam? But yet, they seem to already wish to don the garb of dhimmitude.

I sometimes wonder how anyone can trust the mainstream news organizations, as their attempts to obscure the actual facts and their even hevier-handed attempts to fit news into their own anti-American, anti-capitalist worldview make it impossible to believe anythign that they say. It is particularly amusing that these scribblers, few of whom possess any skills that would allow them to succeed in areal discipline (such as engineering, or even history) and who would be the first targets of the Muslim extremists that they do everything in thyeir power to assist, have such a limited understanding of the events on which they report. And yet they continue to insist that we should give them the power to determine what the rest of us should think. I think not.

Hat tip to Matt Drudge.

About that economy....

Why the White House is not trumpeting this news is beyond me. Despite all the Democratic politicians and their clueless and ignorant stooges in the media (especially the New York Times), a recent report from the Labor Department stated clearly that the jobless rate fell to its lowest since July of 2001, while adding jobs in virtually every industry. The report, found in in the February 3, 2006 online edition of the Times itself, also stated that wages are rising and joblessness is decreasing in virtually every group as well.

This does make me wonder how both the Democrats and their media shills can possibly keep mouthing the mindless 'bad economy' argument when every single number appears to belie said argument. I can only come up with two potential explanations- ignorance and cupidity. Ignorance about the economy- not very difficult when journalists are among the least-qualified individuals to pass judgement on anything other than their feelings, and politicians are bound by their political needs. But at some point, the truth must seep in.

And for those individuals whose policies are responsible for this strong economy (that would be George W. Bush and the Republican Party, for those of you keeping score at home), despite Katrina, the September 11th attacks and a host of depression constantly fed the nation by the supposedly impartial press, you should be taking credit very publicly. That means public crowing, Mr. Bush, so that your discredited Democratic enemies (and they are indeed enemies) are even more discredited with the voters. You would think......

Who Need Fact-Checking?

This post, courtesy of Ed Morrissey is just too funny. It appears that the so-called 'professional' journalists over at AP can't even do the smallest bit of fact-checking when they publish even an obituary for a well-known actor! Read the whole thing- then you may indulge in the belly laughs that this piece of un-professional 'journalism' deserves.

Tell us again, oh mighty and 'professional' MSM, about your 'multiple levels' of fact-checking and editors? Hat tip to Captain Ed Morissey.

Venezuelan Hyberbole

According to the Reuters news agency, Venezuelan "President" Hugo Chavez has now made the claim that US President George Bush (who, unlike Chavez, has actually won fair elections, thus the necessary quotes around Chavez's title. Only Jimmy Carter has approved Chavez's elections, and we all know how much we should trust a Carter asssessment by now.) is worse than Adolf Hitler. Needless to state, Reurters breathlessly put this bit of hyperbole as a lead article, never even reminding its audience how over the top this sort of oratory actually is.

But then, to do that would mean that reporters (who mostly appear to agree with Chavez) actually perform professionally. When was the last time that a US official's assessment or statement that country X constitutes a potential threat was treated as though it was truthful. US statements are almost always framed as 'claims' by the national and international media and treated with suspicion. No such objectivity is given to Chavez's demonstrably false and overwrought claims.

Remind me again about the 'un-biased' press?

More Media Cluelessness

When in Japan, I tend to read the Yomiuri Shinbun's (読売新聞) English edition (since my newspaper Japanese is decidedly rusty). One thing I noticed in the time I have been here, is that the Yomiuri gets a large chunk of its foreign news and op/ed from the Washington Post. This is not in and of itself a bad thing, but it does propagate the general anti-American, anti-Bush cluelessness displayed by so many reporters, both in the United States and abroad.

For example, in the one of the past week's print edition of the Yomiuri, there is a long article about how the United States has become much worse under President Bush. The writer, who apparently has little or no expertise in foreign policy, economics or any other discipline, claimed that our economy was in the tank, that Bush, who came to office promising to unite, not divide, had made polarization worse, that Bush's 'unilateralism' had made the US a pariah nation and that we needed to work very hard to regain our world status.

This fatuous, and extremely untrue article can be refuted at every point. The economy is doing just fine- unless you are a big Hollywood actor who is being reviled for your left-wing views. The war in Iraq is not and never was 'unilateral' and the fact that we have removed two sadistic and unfirendly regimes and replaced them with burgeoning democracies is quite astounding. The PResident's low poll numbers can be attributed to the ferocity and dedication of the national and internationla news organizations to destroying Bush's Presidency. And the 'division' in American politics is a good thing. Let Democrats and Republicans present their differing views (at least for the Republicans- I haven't seen that the Dems HAVE any plans as of yet), and then let the voters decide.

However, the most important point is that this article was in the Yomiuri, but after Googling it, I cannot find it on any US media site. This is backed up by Gaijin Biker's appropriate comments on the infamous Japanese Newsweek cover. It seems that the Press is fearless in attacking America and the Republican Party overseas, but sees to be a little afraid to placing their poisonous opinions wher Americans might actually read them.

Religious Respect and the Press

I was reminded yet again today how our mainstream media has differing standards for different cultures, despite all their bleating abiout 'multiculturalism'. The Boston Globe opined against the famous Muhammad cartoons recently published by a Danish newspaper, complaining that,

...publishing the cartoons reflects an obtuse refusal to accept the profound meaning for a billion Muslims of Islam's prohibition against any pictorial representation of the prophet. Depicting Mohammed wearing a turban in the form of a bomb with a sputtering fuse is no less hurtful to most Muslims than Nazi caricatures of Jews or Ku Klux Klan caricatures of blacks are to those victims of intolerance.

Really? Where was all this respect for religion when the Brooklyn Museum decided that covering a depiction of the Virgin Mary with dung passed as 'art'. At the time, the Boston Globe said,

The mayor said: "You don't have a right to a government subsidy to desecrate someone else's religion." It's a passionate argument, but it ignores the facts and the law. None of the $2 million for the "Sensation" exhibit came from New York City. Serious allegations have been raised about the museum's fund-raising for the exhibit, but that is a separate issue.

Note that the paper didn't seem to feel that Christians had any right to be offended, and certainly the paper did not take their feelings about their religion into account. This same double-standard is applied to actually reporting the news. In the United States, the Press does their best to out anything that might be dtrimental to the governemnt- especially when a Republican Administration is in charge. Contrast this with their willingness to self-censor when they are dealing with non-Christian countries, most infamously by Eason Jordan and CNN in their incestuous relationship with Saddam Hussien's Iraq (and more recently, Google's Chinese portal). Maybe that is why the world's media are so against the removal of Hussein's regime- their lovely little insider status, along with who-knows-what other perks, went away with it.

Is it too much to ask that the Press exhibit even-handedness in regards to ALL religions? I can understand why the world's Muslims are so upset. However, in comparison to the attacks that Chrisitians endure on a daily basis from the Press, this was pretty tame. Even the Boston Globe ought to understand that. If not, perhaps they might want to review their own archives.

And if you are not familiar with said cartoons, seeing as how our 'objective' media won't publish them (imagine if they were anti-Christian; I think I can safely guarantee they would be on everyone's front page in that event) you can view them HERE, courtesy of Captain's Quarters. In the meantime, Michelle Malkin has an honor roll of every blog who has so far had the will to publish these. And the Muslims are giving support to the idea that they are a bunch of crazed theocratic maniacs who want to kill or conquer every non-Muslim in the world- just like the cartoons suggested they were. And by the way, for you Press People, when was the last time the much-maligned Christian Right ran around firing off guns, shouting 'God is Great' and threatening to kill/kidnap/destroy those who demean them in print? Just asking....

Hat tips to Glenn Reynolds, Michelle Malkin and The Volokh Conspiracy.

Remind me again.....

about the Exempt Media's supposed non-alignment in the world of politics. According to William Tate who published in The American Thinker, their supposed neautrality hides a deep and dangerous partisanship. Tate recently published an article exposing the New York Times' hypocrisy regarding the current brouhaha over George Bush's attempts to gather intelligence on terrorists.

According to Tate, under the Clinton Administration, there was a far more invasive intelligence program (code-named Echelon) and according to at least one official, the Clinton Administration sold the information gained from that program to the Democratic National Committee for purely partisan political use against their opponents.

At the time, the New York Times (and the rest of the Exempt Media) had a much more sympathetic approach to Clinton's (far more invasive) program, stating that "...few dispute the necessity of a system like Echelon to apprehend foreign spies, drug traffickers and terrorists...". So what has changed since that time? Apparently, only the political affiliation of occupant of the White House. That and the fact that we are actually at war with a radical terrorost group that has already proven their willingness to kill all of us without compunction.

On is amused at how the professional partisans (certainly not real journalists) at the New York Times so blatantly fail to keep their stories straight. Or maybe the Exempt Media has merely forgotten that they can be fact-checked now by people like us.

Hat tips to the Duke of DeLand and Glenn Reynolds.

国際貴社とアメリカ (International Press and the US)

It is very interesting to view the disconnect between the way the international press corps views the United States and the way that most of the world's population views the same country. The international (and US) press has absolutely no compunctions about publishing derogatory and insulting articles and issues such as the infamous Newsweek Japan highlighted so clearly here. Although Newsweek apparently was afraid to publish that story in the U.S. Interesting how they are so courageous- especially when no Americans are likely to be listening/reading!

However, it is even more interesting how the majority of the world's population clearly disagree with the self-elected elites of the Press. In fact, the US is still the number-one destination for both legal and illegal imigration. While the international press sneers, ordinary people- those who, unlike the majority of the Press actually work for a living- are voting with their feet. You think the Press might notice?

It is my sincere hope that someday the Press' contempt and dislike for their own country, and their despicable tactics in constantly denigrating it, will come home to roost. I only hope I am here to see it.

Hat tip to Gaijin Biker and Michelle Malkin.

So Hamas Wants Our Money

It appears that Hamas, like many of our of the prominent members of own media and the Democratic Party, has not yet realized that elections do have consequences. I see that despite the Palestinian voters' deciding that they want war and not peace, Hamas still wants the West (against whom it has waged a years-long campaign of hateful propaganda) to continue paying its bills.

Captain Ed Morissey put it best, commenting,

Elections have consequences, as I noted in another context. Part of those consequences is a clear understanding of what the Palestinians want as a people. They voted for the radical terrorists, and more importantly, never bothered to form a separate political party based on peaceful coexistence with Israel. They left themselves a choice between Fatah and Hamas. Had they been serious about peace, the voters would have formed a third party based on that goal and overwhelmingly supported it.

I agree. Hamas can whistle for my money until they actually realize that their election victory means that their hateful rhetoric has come home to roost. The West is not obligated to give them money. they are now reaping what they have for so long sown. They will earn our help or our enmity by their future actions. At present however, they have earned nothing but our disdain.

Hat tip to Captain's Quarters.

Japan Trip, Part 2

I was in the electronic mecca of Akihabara this weekend. I remember my previous trip as one where the streets were filled with foreigners and foreign-worshipping Japanese, all of whom were milling around the elecronic goodies prominently displayed. However, I was surprised to find that Akihabara has changed rather drastically.

In the streets, were legions of the sub-group known as 'cosplay', folks who dress up in anime- or manga-inspired costumes and who seem to have become more intense about their hobby with each passing day. The amount of money and detail contained within many of these costumes was startling. Then it also appears that the 'companions' who hawk various merchandise and/or services become younger as well. I could have sworn that this trip they appeared to be around high-school age!

Finally, there is a dearth of low-price options. Japan was never known as a bargain-hunter's paradise, but I did not notice any deals that particularly caught my eye. However, I shall be taking another trip this week, and this time I shall take my camera to provide some documentary evidence. In the menatime. Japan has definitely changed- I am not yet sure if that is for the better or not

Hillary's Hopes...

...have been struck a major blow. In a new CNN/Gallup poll, only 16 percent of voters firmly support her, while an astonsihing 51 percent say there is no way they would vote for her in 2008. This is despite the last five years of Hillary-boosting performed by the 'objective' Mainstream Media. Perhaps this is finally the evidence we have been waiting for that will convince the media how out of touch they are with most Americans, and hopefully this will put the death blow on Hillary's Presidential ambitions. President Hillary would be about as good for this country as Jimmy Carter was.

In related news, ABC's 'Commander-In-Chief' series, which is basically an MSM propaganda device to prepare the country for President Hillary, has been sinking in the ratings. Hopefully this is a corollary sign that Hillary's Presidential aspirations are based in fantasy rather than reality.

Japan trip, Part I

I am in Japan for the next two weeks on a business trip, and I will be blogging on the changes since my last trip. The main thing that is dominating the newspapers is the Livedoor scandal. It appears that wunderkid Horie Takafumi, the erstwhiel founder/president of Livedoor, cooked his accounting books to make it appear that Livedoor was doing better than it actually was. This scandal has mostly flown under the US media's radar, but it is dominating the media here in Japan. I have been amused at the feeding frenzy as every move by police and prosecurotrs is followed by a swarm of media members. It reinforces my opinion of most media members as fatuous, slavish followers who rarely if ever have the knowledge or professionalism to actually do their own homework.

In other news, it appeare that Japan is finally starting to come out from the post-bubble blues that have affected its economy for so long. I am noticing that there are fewer stories in the news about the bad economics, although that may have something to do with the approaching Olympics, which the J-media usually follows obsessively- at least as long as there are Japanese medal hopes.....

NY Times' WhistleBlower Standards

The New York Times appears to have a double standard for whistle-blowers. If you are a Democrat who releases information damaging (or potentially damaging) to the Bush Administratiojn and to the United States security, you are a 'patriotic hero'. However, if you release information that is damaging (or potentially damaging) to the Clintons, particularly hillary's 2008 Presidential run, you are "someone sympathetic to the Barrett investigation who wanted his criticism of the Clinton administration to be known."

Apparently the Times cannot see past their blind partisanship long enough to recognize real abuses of power- especially when said abuses are committed by their golden children, the Clintons. The complete article is HERE. Read the whole thing and compare it with their coverage of previous leaks- for example Joe Wilson's infamous op-ed.

Hat tip to Matt Drudge.

Nuclear Iran

I have been somewhat lax in posting of late, due to personal and professional conflicts which made it difficult to keep my blog current. Hwoever, I happened to notice that the European Union apprently has actually pulled its head out of the sand, recognizing the futility of further diplomatic efforts vis-a-vis Iran.

This is probably not particularly news-worthy save for the fact that it marks the first time in recent memory that the EU has abandoned its selfish and possibly suicidal attempts to undermine the United Statest at every step of the way. Perhaps with a nuclear Iran looming around the corner, and with a mad dictator in North Korea possibly already having nuclear weapons, the Euros will come to their senses and assist the U.S in dealing with a reality that even the delusional Left must recognize can have no good ends.

Hat tip to Captain Ed.

Teddy Kennedy, Historian

We have known for some time that Senator Edward Kennedy (D-Massachusetts) is a drunken buffoon. However, Teddy's distance from reality has become ever more marked since the election of President George W. Bush. The latest example came when the Hero of Chappaquiddick either deliberately re-wrote or (more likely, considering his mental capacity) forgot history, claiming that Barry Goldwater won the 1964 election.

Since 1964 was the only time since World War II that a Democratic presidential candidate has won in a landslide (sorry, Clintonistas, your boy never got close to winning fifty percent of the vote), this is a fairly amusing historical re-write, in my opinion. But then Teddy-boy never was much on either responsibility or reality. Too many cocktails, I guess.

Hat tip to Glenn Reynolds.

Barbra Sightings

There has been a Barbra Streisand sighting! Apparently content with her embarrassing screeds against our elected Adminstration, Ms Streisand has kept herself in a fairly low profile after her atrocious grammar and even less sightly logic were exposed by the blogosphere during our last election cycle. However, she seems to think that the voting public (most of whom have intellectual achievements that far surpass hers) might want to hear what she opines on current events. Not that she has any expertise or even real knowledge on said events. So she has published yet another amusing example of her lack of comprehension of said process. Among her comments is the following:

The result of the December election has plunged Iraq into political turmoil. Preliminary results showed the advancement of the United Iraqi Coalition, supported by the Shiite religious figure Ayatullah Ali al-Seistani. Days after the election, Sunni Arab leaders had angrily rejected early election results, saying that the vote has been fixed to favor the Shiite majority party.

Ms. Streisand ought to have graduated high school at least. Had she accomplished that much, she would understand that elections do usually tend to favor the majority in a country with elected officials. It certainly does in this country (despite Democratic wishes to the contrary). And that the process of creating a representative government is not always neat and pretty. Our own certainly was not. Does Ms Streisand not remember the Articles of Confederation? Therefore, to claim that Iraq is 'plunged into political turmoil' is an asinine analysis of the actual situation. Furthermore, the cry of 'Rigged' is a long-stnding favorite of would-be autocrats (see the Bolsheviks, the Democrats, and any other group who has not received the results they wish from an election).

If Ms. Streisand really believes the elections were a mistake, perhaps she would offer a realistic alternative, as opposed to merely repeating the tired old 'Bush Failed' and Bush Lied' slogans so loved by comrades on the Left. If we are no safer than we were in 2001, then why, Ms. Streisand, are the al Quaeda poeople hiding in caves, while you and your friends are able to continue your anti-American screeds with little fear? But that would require actual understanding of the strategic and political situation- something Ms. Streisand, for all her undoubted musical talent, sadly lacks.

And in Japan...

The new year 2006 brings new predictions of what's hot and what's not from the Asahi Geino, courtesy of the Daily Mainichi's Wai-Wai. Among the predictions- butts replace breasts as a focus in pin-ups, ramen noodles are going to be at the forefront of a price war and Japan's safety is not as sure as it once was.

While these predictions can be taken with a large grain of salt, every once in a while they do stand the test of time. Read the whole thing. Now if only Oprah could do that for the United States. I would love to know what is going to be hot next year in advance. It would greatly simplify my investment strategy!

VDH on Europe

In the wake of Mark Steyn's take-no-prisoners approach to the future of what we think of as 'The West', which equates mostly to Western Europe (and the United States) that I highlighted earlier this week, Victor Davis Hanson has weighed in as well on the potentially suicidal results of Europe's increasingly asinine attempts to have their cake and eat it too. Professor Hanson concludes with this gem:

Either your economy will reform, your populace multiply, and your citizenry defend itself, or not. And if not, then Europe as we have known it will pass away — to the great joy of the Islamists but to the terrible sorrow of America.

Read the whole thing. Courtesy of National Review Online.

Border Wars, episode xx...

The Mexican government has been belly-aching recently about the United States' increasing desires to do something about the lack of border security between ourselves and the great state of Mexico. Of course the Mexican government's real motive is to ensure that the illegal flow of immigration north can continue, thus allowing the corrupt status quo in Mexico to also continue.

However, according to Reuters, Mexicans are shooting at US Border Patrol agents on the US side of the border. Some of these shots are reported to be originating in Mexico. This seems to indicate that 1) Mexicans don't appear to regard the sovereignty of the United States with any respect and 2) that Americans who are proposing more substantial barriers and patrols along the US/Mexican border may have a point.

I would strongly advise the United States of America to stop pussy-footing and send in the United States Army to patrol the border, since it is clear that law enforcement is out-gunned by the Mexican smugglers. And in a related note, can we PLEASE cease being worried about how the Mexicans will view our actions. Polls consistently show that a majority of Americans, and a huge majority in the border states, support stronger barriers and enforcement of the borders. It's time to think about our own sovereignty, without being concerned about what Mexico will think. Maybe they might even clean up their own economy if we can close off their illegal trade. We hope....

Jihad Commentary, Part One

The United States, together with the majority of Western and Eastern European countries, is a non-Muslim country. I certainly have no qualms speaking frankly about the prophet Muhammad, who by all accounts was a failed business man living on his wife's money while he enjoyed hashish-induced dreams. So why are we so concerned about Muslims' feelings? They seem to have absolutely no compunction about mistreating or insulting peoples of other faiths/cultures, yet we in the West can't even publish humourous cartoons of Mohammed? Muslims have no problems making statements calling for the death of Christians. but we non-Muslims somehow cannot speak out in defense of our faiths without being labelled 'racist'? Something has gone very wrong when non-Muslims can be slaughtered in the streets of their home (non-Islamic) countries merely for producing what Miuslims see as unacceptable but non-Muslims in those same countries cannot even speak out against the excesses of so many Muslim rites without fear of reprisal.

I was listening to Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch this morning on KSFO 560 AM, and he made the (true) point that Islam is unique among the world's religions in demanding that its adherents make war and forcibly take over (and convert or kill) the rest of the world. Jihad, or holy war, long pre-dates any modern explanation, and is in fact responsible for the Crusades, which were, after all, an attempt to retake Jerusalem and the Holy Land from the bloodthirsty hordes that had sacked it.

Organized Christian sects such as Catholicism, for all their (Inquisition, etc) excesses, have never gone to the extent of calling for forcible conversion and conquest of the whole whorld. Nor is Christiasnity known as a top-down religion, Historically, it flowers among those on the bottom of society. Islam, on the other hand, is a top-down religion, and one that has tried on several separate occasions to take over Europe, beginning with the conquest of most of the Iberian peninsula in 715. These assaults intensified after the Ottoman Turks took the Christian kingdom of Constantinople in 1453. These assaults captured what is today Eastern Europe, and came very close to conquering all of Europe. The last of these continual attacks finally was defeated in 1683 before the gates of Vienna

Storm Warnings

From Mark Steyn, courtesy of the National Review Online. Mr. Steyn has written a new article about the impending decline and fall of what we think of as the West. This is not pleasant stuff, but no matter what your political persuasion, you might want to read this and give it some serious thought. Steyn pulls no punches, and I think he has a very strong argument. Demographics don't lie. Pour yourself a strong cup of java and read the whole thing.

Media Falsehoods Ring in New Year

And it seems that despite all the evidence that 'professional' reporters are not performing their jobs with any degree of professionalism, the media still can't seem to correct its propensity for error on a grand scale.

The West Virginia mine tragedy that has been on most front pages of late was exacerbated by the Exempt Media as they reported the wrong news without any confirmation, then failed to change their reports even as doubt set in. Yet they had the arrogance to blame the mine company for the wrong reports, without even admitting their own culpability.

I don't know how, but it seems to me that we need some way of punishing the media when they fall into these traps. After all, this is at least the third major example of false reporting from the MSM in less than a year. The true picture of the war in Iraq, the Bush 'fake-but-true' memos, the New Orleans hurricane and now this. All caused be media hubris and their herd mentality. Something needs to change. Soon.

Hat tip to Matt Drudge.

Happy New Year...

and Merry Christmas to all. In any event, after taking the passt few days off from blogging, I have returned and hope that everyone had a happy, healthy and joyous New Year. May 2006 be a better year than 2005